Rank each
candidate in order of preference (1st, 2nd, etc.) Most
jurisdictions limit choice to ranking three places for simplicity even if
there are more candidates running, while other jurisdictions allow all
candidates to be ranked.

Candidate with a majority of first place votes wins. If
no candidate acquires an initial absolute majority (more than half the votes)
counting moves to another round (runoff) where the candidate with the fewest
number of first-preference rankings is eliminated and these prior round votes
redistributed, the process being repeated until a candidate that achieves the
required majority
within any specific round of counting, wins.

Caveat:
reaching an "absolute voter majority" is a theoretical requirement, but not
always a reality in U.S. IRV elections.

Local
elections in several U.S. cities (e.g., San Francisco, Minneapolis), Oscar
Best Picture, Australian Parliament elections, City of London,

•More expressivity than plurality voting
(voters can say more about their candidate preferences)

•Voters can vote honest favorite

•Lowers some costs associated with
two-round system elections (e.g., common in California elections, see California Proposition 14)

•Proponents claim it reduces negative
campaigning

•Proponents claim it increases voter
turnout

•Strongest political momentum of the voting
alternatives

•Unfamiliar to many

•Complex calculation process

•Confusion has led to over-voting and
under-voting (more eliminated ballots)

•Information costs (ranking more than
one candidate requires more voter knowledge)

•Voter fatigue in the ranking process

•Critics claim decreases voter turnout

•Critics worry combining two elections
(e.g., two-round system in California) into one reduces public exposure to
candidate positions on issues

•Less sophisticated voters tend to be
marginalized (e.g., choose not to vote at all, ballots disqualified because
of over or under-voting)

•Constitutional challenges

•Can be expensive to implement

•Creates a false majority (e.g., 3rd
ranked choices can get redistributed as a 1st ranked choices; many
ballots are disqualified)

•Practicing jurisdictions experience
time delays if runoff is necessary (not ÒinstantÓ; have to wait for ballots
from least popular candidates to be redistributed)

•Potential security problems if using
computerized voting system (hacking)